Enterprise Systems Success: A Measurement Model

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS
SUCCESS:
A MEASUREMENT MODEL
PRESENTED BY:
JAPNEET SINGH 09609131
DEEPIKA PARASHAR 09609026
ANSHU SOOD 09609122
ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A
Tuesday, December 07, 2021 MEASUREMENT MODEL 1
OBJECTIVE
To assess enterprise systems success from
multiple perspectives, where
MODEL EMPLOYS 4 DIMENSIONS:
 Information quality
 System quality
 Individual impact
 Organizational impact

INTRODUCTION
IS investments are under increasing scrutiny & pressure to justify
their value & contribution to productivity, quality &
competitiveness of organizations
Conflicting results of assessing value of IS attributable to:

 Incomplete or inappropriate measures of success
 Lack of theoretical grounding of causal & process models of IS
 Myopic focus on financial performance indicators
Weakness in:
 Survey instruments employed (eg. constructs lacking in validity)
 Data collection approach (eg. asking the wrong people)

MODELS AND MEASURES OF IS SUCCESS
Enterprise Systems- Entails:
 Many users ranging from top executives to data entry
operators.
 Many applications that span the orgz.
 Diversity of capabilities & functionality.
Abovementioned characteristics suggest that existing models of

IS success may not be entirely appropriate for measuring success
of ES
Moreover,
 Substantial investments have been made by orgzs around the world
 Attempt to measure success of ES have been few
 Impact resulting from ES are difficult to measure

LITERATURE REVIEW
IS success model, an attempt to represent the interdependent , process nature of 6
IS success constructs:
 Systems quality
 Information quality
 Use
 User Satisfaction
 Individual Impact
 Organizational impact
Understanding IS evaluation (Contributions Delone & McLean)

 Model construct provide classification of many IS evaluation measures
 Approach begins to identify relevant stakeholders group in the process of
evaluation
 Suggest a model of interdependencies among the constructs
ES BENEFITS FRAMEWORK
SHANG & SEDDON FRAMEWORK
Classifies potential ERP into 21 lower level measures organized

around 5 main categories:
 Operational benefits
 Managerial benefits
 Strategic benefits
 IT infrastructure benefits
 Organizational benefits
Abovementioned framework is yet to be operationalized

GAPS IN EXISTING IS SUCCESS STORIES
ISSUES IN IS SUCCESS MODELS, REMAIN:
 Mutual exclusivity and additivity of success measures

Represent distinct dimensions of a complex, high-order phenomenon.
 Model completeness
Employment of only one or a subset of dimensions of success as a
surrogate for overall success may be one of the reasons for mixed
results reported in the literature regarding the antecedents of success.
 Choice of IS success dimensions

Constructs & measures to be selected systematically considering
contingency variables like organizational structure, size or technology
& the individual characteristics of the system, in order to develop a
comprehensive measurement model for a particular context.

 Excessive emphasis on quantitative(financial) measures
Common tendency to measure ES (and IS generally) only in terms of
financial criteria. Although, IS investments are in many ways comparable to
traditional investments such as production equipment.
 Nature of the contemporary IS environment

Modern IS trend is toward changed organizational structures & behavior
that facilitates interorganizational activities. New measures and evaluation
models are required to measure success with contemporary IS.
 Multiple stakeholder perspectives

Attempted to quantify the benefits & drawbacks of IS by analyzing data
collected mostly at very senior levels of the firm only.

MODEL BUILDING
 The Inventory survey
 Mapping
 Selecting a framework

ADAPTING & OPERATIONLIZING
THE SELECTED FRAMEWORK
Operationalization of the beginning model proceeds
as follows:
 revisit relevance of the Delone and McLean use
construct
 revisit relevance of user satisfaction
 define a more expansive organizational impacts
construct
 introduce further Esrelated measures
 remove measures that are inappropriate for this study.

A PRIOR MODEL
Tuesday, December 07, 2021 ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A 11

MEASUREMENT MODEL
MODEL TESTING
 The weights survey
 Construct validity
 Criterion validity

REVISED MODEL

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH
 Deflects concerns over lack of theoretical justification
by conceiving dimensions of a measurement model
rather than constructs in a causal or process model
 Diffuses this concern through clear statement of the
rationale for choice of dimensions, grounded in the
exploratory survey and related mapping exercise
 Clearly states the rationale for selection of the success
measures
 Presents empirical evidence of the irrelevance of use
in the study context
IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH cont…
 Evidences the redundancy of a usefulness construct,

given a complete set of measures of the four study
model dimensions
 Presents a strong rationale for conceiving satisfaction
as an overarching measure of success rather than as a
dimension
 Validates the final model from multiple stakeholder
perspectives: management, user, and technical

STUDY REFLECTS
 Close attention to the mutual exclusivity of the dimensions
 The most extensive and complete set of IS measures tested in a
single IS success study
 First Operationalization and test of the Myers et al. (1997) IS
success framework
 First test of the completeness and relevance of the six Delone
and McLean (1992) constructs
 First partial empirical test of the Shang and Seddon (2000)
benefits framework
 Evidence of the additivity of the four model dimensions, and the
validity of an overall measure of success based in their
combination
IMPT. FINDINGS FOR ES CONTEXT
 Validates the model constructs and measures in a

contemporary ES context
 First comprehensive empirical, quantitative
assessment of ES success reported in the academic
press
 Illustrates the relative importance of nonfinancial
measures of ES success

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
 Used to benchmark organization/department with ES
 Model is generalizable and appropriate for measuring ES
 Model and instrument are readily adaptable to other ES
by simply replacing the term SAP with some reference to
an alternate ES
 Offer a practical means for organizations to evaluate the
success of complex, contemporary information systems
like ES.
 Explicitly been designed to work for all levels of the
organization

Enterprise Systems Success: A Measurement Model

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Enterprise Systems Success: A Measurement Model

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

Conflicting results of assessing value of IS attributable to:

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

Abovementioned characteristics suggest that existing models of

 Attempt to measure success of ES have been few

 Impact resulting from ES are difficult to measure

Understanding IS evaluation (Contributions Delone & McLean)

Classifies potential ERP into 21 lower level measures organized

Abovementioned framework is yet to be operationalized

 Mutual exclusivity and additivity of success measures

 Choice of IS success dimensions

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

 Nature of the contemporary IS environment

 Multiple stakeholder perspectives

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

Tuesday, December 07, 2021 ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A 11

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

 Evidences the redundancy of a usefulness construct,

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

 Validates the model constructs and measures in a

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS SUCCESS : A

You might also like